Lets call the NVIDIA Shield Android TV what it is — a console competitor

Google and NVIDIA have come together to release a proper game console, one that has a surprisingly good out of the box experience.

You can't throw a stick without hitting someone writing something about the downfall of the game console. Mobile gaming has exploded such that catering to the casual gamer seems like a more viable business model to some, and with a game console in your pocket what need have you for a device that tethers you to the couch? It's a broad brush to paint with, and this past console generation proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that the console gamer is not only here to stay, but demands more.

This amazing clash of gaming cultures is precisely why the NVIDIA Shield exists, and if the companies responsible for bringing it to life can keep the content flowing it's likely we'll soon recognize this device as the fourth major game console on the market.

The road so far...

The line between set top box and game console has gotten awful blurry over the last couple of years. Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo all came into this last generation of devices with a "home entertainment" theme, and plenty of apps to support the notion that you needn't ever leave the device you are currently using. The Xbox One went so far as to include an HDMI passthrough, so cable subscribers could watch TV through the Xbox and not ever really need to change inputs. Nintendo's massive gamepad doubles as a universal remote, as well as a handy second screen controller for all of the streaming apps. These enhancements are all about removing as many steps as possible between you and the game, and so far it has worked incredibly well.

Google and Apple are trying to become a more significant presence in the living room, and in response Microsoft and Sony are pushing into the mobile world.

At the same time, console folks have seen the benefits of playing nice with indie devs and casual gamers. Sony's indie support is incredible, and includes a ton of free or inexpensive games that can be played for hours or minutes alongside the budding PlayStation Now game streaming service. Microsoft has been a little slower on the indie support, but has also been focused on making Windows 10 an integral part of the gaming experience for those that want it. These moves are all about being the one device for everyone, which is great for every kind of user but one — those mobile gamers that prefer their phones and live in that ecosystem already.

Microsoft and Sony can bring over a handful of popular mobile games to the world of big screens and controllers, but they can't have a significant portion of that ecosystem because it's already owned by Google and Apple, and that's the dividing line right now. Google and Apple are trying to become a more significant presence in the living room so their content can grow into that space, and in response Microsoft and Sony are pushing their own content ecosystems into the mobile world to grow in that space. Neither have gained significant ground on the other's turf, because neither can adequately fill the gaps created by an incomplete offering. It's a standstill for the most part, and it'll take a massive push in one direction or the other to make any significant headway.

NVIDIA's massive push

While Google was clearly not prepared to make Android TV a living room sensation with the Nexus Player, with NVIDIA's help there's hope for the platform. The NVIDIA Shield Android TV checks all of the right boxes for mobile gamers and content consumers out of the box, with 200+ Android games available at launch and just about every streaming media app out there. Cable cutters get an extra push with support for IP tuners and OTA tuners, with a friendly TV Guide-like UI to bring it all together. With Google Cast and HDMI-CEC embedding Chromecast functionality into the box and Google's recent push towards letting your friends use their phones as controllers for some games, you've got a reasonable kit for people embedded in the Google ecosystem.

Grid gives you the ability to stream a massive list of AAA games at 1080p and stores all of your progress online.

The NVIDIA Shield exclusive games and access to the NVIDIA Grid gaming service is where the crossover into console land happens. The Shield exclusives have been a part of NVIDIA's device lineup for a while now, and include some new titles like Borderlands: The Pre-Sequel! and remastered heavyweights like Doom 3: BFG Edition and Half-Life 2: Episode Two top a list of 20 titles that can be installed to the device and played native. Meanwhile, Grid gives you the ability to stream a massive list of AAA games at 1080p and stores all of your progress online. The games launch almost instantly and if you have a decent internet connection offers a flawless experience, and while we don't yet have details on pricing for this system we know that games will be available a la carte, so you'll be able to buy the game and play it just like you would anywhere else. Oh, and did I mention PC gaming on the couch? NVIDIA GameStream may not be the simplest thing in the world to use, but it already supports a ton of games. If you've got a gaming rig, you should be just a little curious.

There's really only one thing missing, and that's multiplayer online gameplay and the community services associated with that experience. Google Play Games is a far cry from the monstrous creations that are PlayStation Online and Xbox Live, and NVIDIA has no compelling alternative. This isn't a problem if you're taking the casual route in your gameplay, or if you appreciate local gameplay and a good story, but it means the matchmaking FPS crowd aren't going to be as interested in these offerings for not. The upside is that NVIDIA and Google could change this with relative ease, as long as they can get game publishers to play nice and support this budding platform.

The next big thing in gaming... maybe.

With most of the pieces in place and a perfectly reasonable price point for the hardware and features being offered, the only thing that will keep the NVIDIA Shield Android TV from being successful is Google and NVIDIA. With an appropriate marketing plan and a long-term plan for AAA titles on the console, there's a decent chance this will be the device that brings Android TV out of obscurity.

Personally, this is my new favorite console. I can stream games from my PC if I'm in the mood, but I'll also be able to play on Grid and enjoy multiplayer when friends come over, on top of being a suitable replacement for my Chromecast. This isn't going to cause mass exodus with people to throwing out the ecosystems they are currently embedded in, but unlike previous efforts all of the right pieces are there for this console to be taken seriously. It's a great first step, and with any luck this device will get the attention it deserves.

Lets call the NVIDIA Shield Android TV what it is — a console competitor

I don't think this will be what everyone wants it to be. Heres the reality. This system relies heavily on streaming. The US's internet infrastructure currently can't handle game streaming. The number of people who can get the full usage of this system is quite small in the U.S. Second Playstation already has a game streaming service (PS Now), and Xbox will have streaming capability with Windows 10. Third, the games aren't really there. People buy the consoles for exclusives and so far the exclusives mentioned for this are old games from the 7th gen. If it wants to compete with consoles it has to have games you can't get anywhere else at all, and lastly if this wants to be a console competitor will we see new releases on it? Will games like Star Wars Battlefront, Street Fighter V, and the Next Call of Duty be available on this system when they release? I doubt it.

I like what Nvidia is doing a lot. Seamless access to both Android and PC ecosystems on the same platforms is something very few are offering in a compelling way. That said, cloud gaming (either in-home or subscription service) isn't an exclusive feature by any means. The only real differentiator there is Steam.

Valve has been pushing their presence on TV for awhile now. I see the Shield TV as doing a better job of it than any boxes running SteamOS and using that ridiculous controller, though SteamOS will help game developers decouple from Windows in the long haul.

I'd love to pick something like this up as a VERY casual gamer. No cable here so we use streaming devices (roku and fire sticks) for Hulu, Netflix, etc, so if I could pick up a box like this that does both well and easily I'd be down, but the pricing? 200 for 16GB or $100 more for 484GB more? I'll just wait till the 16GB comes down in price.

Yes. That's why that model exists. You can even add an external drive via USB or microSD and change the settings for app installation to use external storage or that card. Got this information from the PCPer review.

I own a PS4 and a Wii U for this console gen and the Nvidia Shield doesn't offer any "games" that I have to buy this console to play, in fact...most of it's "big titles" are last generation games....I have my PS3 hooked up still just so I can play my huge library of 7th gen titles...

For tablets/smartphones maybe but this adapter supports Intel WiDi which is much less laggy than Miracast. I have a Wireless AC adapter, AMD Radeon R7 M270 and my games have no lag at all. My PC has 8GB of RAM and a Broadwell Intel Core i7 5500U CPU.

You have a laptop, why not just bypass the wireless and connect to the TV. Streaming is useful for people with tower systems that are difficult to move. However, adding widi would cost probably $100 since desktops rarely have this feature.

This is more of an extension to mobile gaming, rather than a competitor to a gaming Console or PC gaming system. it may help people that play games on phones, pick this system up. Along with the exclusives, as previously mentioned, this seems aimed at another market, although it is an established one. Mobile games are good when you are out and about and want to play something quickly, but they don't replace a gaming Console or PC gaming system. The PS4 performs better than the Xbox One, in most cases, but title exclusive help both console's. The PC version will generally be the best option when a game is not exclusive to a console. The NVIDIA Shield won't win that market over, it just may help mobile gamers pick up a cheaper console.

Very positive words about this Russ. I think it's only the start of mobile chipsets powering viable game consoles. Nintendo commented recently that their next platform, Codename 'will not replace Wii U and 3DS' (paraphrasing). I thought that was an interesting thing to say. Because what could they be coming up with that could replace both of those devices? Well. Two devices. They could be coming up with two devices that are compatible with the same software.

NVIDIA with the Shield TV is showing off how powerful Tegra X1 is, and there have been rumors here and there, some certifications have popped up alluding to a Shield Portable successor with Tegra X1. If this happens, then NVIDIA will have a console, and a handheld console that are compatible with all of the very same games. This got me thinking. Could Nintendo be planning such a strategy with NX? Granted. It doesn't have to be exactly the same chipset in both console and handheld - just enough to run the exact same graphics and processing API's that the other does so that games could possibly work just fine whether someone chooses to play them on handheld or console.

The Tegra X1 is a very very small chip. Desktop and laptop GPU's and CPU's tend to be much bigger in some cases than ARM chipsets. With what NVIDIA packed into such a tiny chip in the Tegra X1 - 256 Maxwell GPU cores - it stands to reason that they could do something bigger physically than the X1, with a higher energy and thermal output that has a significantly more powerful GPU in addition to 8 ARM based cores. I think it's very possible that while NVIDIA has created a very interesting device here with the Tegra X1 platform to go with it - that it's only the beginning of what might come next.

AMD is also working on their own custom ARM architecture under the name K12. With the current generation's reliance on AMD APU's and graphics chipsets from Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo - I really am starting to think that AMD (or NVIDIA for that matter if the Tegra X1 caught Nintendo or another company's attention like it did mine) could definitely come up with chips that would make fully software compatible games between console and handheld possible.

And with X1 and other potential future Tegra chipsets having full DX12, Vulkan and whatever new API's are established supported, these ARM based chipsets are becoming much more viable for set top boxes of this kind. And with HBM coming down the pipeline soon, if they were to cram such a chip with a healthy amount of RAM for the graphics to feed from right on the die. The performance could be killer.

But I'm pretty AMD is already releasing it's 3D stacked memoey and their current gen cards have full DX12 support, too. Plus, the leak of R9 390X, if it turns out to be accurate, pins the performance of that GPU at 8.6TFLOPS,which is far higher than anything NVIDIA has in the announced pipeline for anything with a single-gpu.

I don't think there's going to be much shift in who's dominant overt the next few years between AMD and NVIDIA. It will be interesting to see though

True. But HBM is going to be for everyone. It's a great innovation from AMD and SK Hynix (spelling error, maybe). NVIDIA has claimed 1TB/s memory bandwidth for their Pascal architecture GPUs next year using HBM2 memory. And Intel and others have shown interest in using HBM. HBM could be something that makes RAM itself less of a bottleneck for both CPU and GPU. We could see chips that make the RAM that users or manufacturers install on the motherboard only supplemental to the RAM that could be prepacked onto the CPU (or APU) dies themselves.

I can replace my OUYA with this, and not only have exponentially more potential for current/future games - and a million times the media options...but I can have at least as much (and probably a lot more) accessibility to the retro gaming emulators, which is my primary use for, and main motivation behind getting the OUYA in the first place!

Not that I'd get rid of the OUYA entirely, mind you. I can put it in the bedroom and play Turbografx16 in bed! But this is everything OUYA is, done much better, plus a whole heck of a lot more, and I'd exponentially rather have this dude in my living room instead!

Controller is a thousand times better than the Ouya though, I was a very early kickstarter backer and I thought the device was decent but its controller was never very impressive. The build quality, features and responsiveness on the Shield controller is second to none.

Yeah, the controller is a real downer on the OUYA. I mean, just speaking personally, I think it looks great, and feels great! But yeah, the build quality is horrible, constantly sending me right or left when I mean to go up, etc, etc. Plus, there is a serious latency issue.

It makes playing the old games on the emulators a bazillion times harder. I've never driven one of those "drunk driver simulators" but I can only think of the OUYA controller as the video game equivalent.

I'm exceedingly glad to hear the shield controller is built much better and works much better. I think this little device is definitely going in the "Lord willing, definitely", and "as soon as flippin possible" categories....

I could care less tbh. I have a PC that's hooked up to steam. I might start caring when Android devices are powerful enough to emulate PS2 and GameCube games smoothly. Until then, this is not really a "console" I would ever consider buying.

I think the biggest hurdle for Google, apple, and Amazon is getting controller/keyboard support for touch games. The reverse for Microsoft and Sony, although Microsoft seems to be unifying windows 10 so that Xbox games will work on mobile and PC. The PC gaming industry is far bigger than mobile and console combined so being able to play PC and console games on my phone would be the best way to get me into mobile gaming. Nvidia has the streaming thing yeah, it doesn't work with my PC.

"PC Gaming on the couch"...unless you use a wired gaming keyboard, wired gaming mouse, and wired gaming headset. In which case, you either have to have multiple cables strung across your living room floor, buy all wireless devices (which might solve it..except they don't make wireless gaming keyboards yet), or buy a Couchmaster (http://www.steigerdynamics.com/products-couchmaster-features).

PC gaming on the couch without cables is possible without Nvidia Shield, you just need a Microsoft Wireless Display adapter, works great on my Dell Inspiron 15 with AMD Radeon R7 M270 card. You can use the Xbox One controller also for non RPG games.
The Nvidia shield should stick to mobile games, not AAA PC games.
Just my 2 cents.

Yea, it could be something they need to watch. But with games like halo for Xbox and uncharted for PlayStation, I think they're doing ok. Also, unless Destiny comes to nvidia console things will be just fine for them. But it will be interesting to see what kind of games and deals nvidia comes up with.

That said, there is no way they can do that within the power constraints, or have the 4k support.

Their current products may be able to emulate some of what Nvidia is doing, but saying the consoles are more than capable in regards to their hardware, is giving the AMD chip far too much credit, and discounting what Nvidia has been able to do with their SoC.

Anandtech has a great review of the actual numbers on the unit, and even the load ratings are below 15w for something that easily bests many "budget gaming" computer builds in GPU power.

He said more than capable of GRID. Which is pretty easy.. Since GRID is cloud based high powered PCs streaming games at 1080p60. The current consoles can stream that kind of content. So yes. They're capable of receiving content from a GRID like service.

I heard Sony is going to be releasing a cloud gaming platform for the PS4/PS3 sometime relatively soon. Rumors have been steadily pulling since they bought Gaikai a few years back. And Microsoft already implements partial server-side technology for some XBOX ONE games like Forza 5.

The AMD "Kaveri" APUs that are used in the XBOX ONE and PS4 churn out 1.39TFLOPS and 1.81TFLOPS respectively. The chips may be "busget" but they're still in a class ahead of the X1. AMD worked very closely with Microsoft and Sony for the better part of the late 2000s and early 2010s to ensure a powerful product... Of course, neither of these compare to the 4.8TFLOPS you'd get from snatching up a Radeon R9 290x or the 5.1 from a GTX 780 ti. All-in-all,I hardly see the console as anything more than a sexy case of multiple personality disorder. I don't think it will last, especially when it's "big" titles are all games I've already owned and have been playing for years.

I think Nintendo can nail it if they'd push it on the Wii U. Its already a decent gaming console, but if they'd just push towards developing media apps, think they would have something. Thing I really like about the Wii u pad is I can use it as a remote control for the TV.

PlayStation Now already exists, though it is for PS3 games over the internet. Ironically they are PS3 systems running at remote servers. The big difference is Nvidia controls the whole hardware and software stack to minimize latency. If you can't control both then you cannot eliminate latency in hardware (eg. Encoding delay).